FAQ
Hi,

just a question on whether there is a known ETA for it. The reason I'm
asking is that I accidentially removed some 5.2. kernel support from
ATrpms (not for the 5.2 plus kernels, just the vendor ones) and if
5.3 would take longer I would rebuild the erased bits. Otherwise I
would ask the users to wait for a couple of days.

Thanks!
--
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20090215/577aaf5d/attachment.bin

Search Discussions

  • Fabian Arrotin at Feb 15, 2009 at 9:34 pm

    Axel Thimm wrote:
    Hi,

    just a question on whether there is a known ETA for it. The reason I'm
    asking is that I accidentially removed some 5.2. kernel support from
    ATrpms (not for the 5.2 plus kernels, just the vendor ones) and if
    5.3 would take longer I would rebuild the erased bits. Otherwise I
    would ask the users to wait for a couple of days.

    Thanks!
    Hi Axel,

    There is still no ETA because QA has not yet started (packages were not
    pushed to the QA tree). We're still waiting for Karanbir to come back
    from his honeymoon and/or Johnny to reappear ... so maybe you'd better
    continue providing support for the 5.2 kernels. But it's up to you of
    course ;-)

    --
    --
    Fabian Arrotin
    idea=`grep -i clue /dev/brain` ; test -z "$idea" && echo "sorry, init
    6 in progress" || sh ./answer.sh
  • Charlie Brady at Feb 15, 2009 at 10:41 pm

    On Sun, 15 Feb 2009, Fabian Arrotin wrote:

    There is still no ETA because QA has not yet started (packages were not
    pushed to the QA tree). We're still waiting for Karanbir to come back
    from his honeymoon and/or Johnny to reappear ... so maybe you'd better
    continue providing support for the 5.2 kernels. But it's up to you of
    course ;-)
    Is there anything we can do to help? It seems unfortunate that progress on
    this project might stop if one person goes on a honeymoon and another
    disappears.
  • David Hrbáč at Feb 16, 2009 at 9:25 am

    Charlie Brady napsal(a):
    Is there anything we can do to help? It seems unfortunate that progress on
    this project might stop if one person goes on a honeymoon and another
    disappears.
    Hi,
    I'm also prepared to lend a helping hand. I consider the state not
    enough for "enterprise community distro".
    Regards,
    David Hrb??
  • Phil Schaffner at Feb 16, 2009 at 7:34 pm

    On Mon, 2009-02-16 at 10:25 +0100, David Hrb?? wrote:
    Charlie Brady napsal(a):
    Is there anything we can do to help? It seems unfortunate that progress on
    this project might stop if one person goes on a honeymoon and another
    disappears.
    Hi,
    I'm also prepared to lend a helping hand. I consider the state not
    enough for "enterprise community distro".
    Agreed - shades of the WhiteBox single-string developer model come to
    mind. OTOH, managing a team approach has its own overhead - sometimes
    it's easier to do-it-yourself.

    I have quite a lot of experience building packages from assorted SRPMs
    for local use - would be glad to pitch in if help is desired, and as
    "real life" permits. In any case, efforts of the core team/developers
    are much appreciated.

    Phil
  • Manuel Wolfshant at Feb 16, 2009 at 7:36 pm

    On 02/16/2009 09:34 PM, Phil Schaffner wrote:
    On Mon, 2009-02-16 at 10:25 +0100, David Hrb?? wrote:

    Charlie Brady napsal(a):
    Is there anything we can do to help? It seems unfortunate that progress on
    this project might stop if one person goes on a honeymoon and another
    disappears.
    Hi,
    I'm also prepared to lend a helping hand. I consider the state not
    enough for "enterprise community distro".
    Agreed - shades of the WhiteBox single-string developer model come to
    mind. OTOH, managing a team approach has its own overhead - sometimes
    it's easier to do-it-yourself.

    I have quite a lot of experience building packages from assorted SRPMs
    for local use - would be glad to pitch in if help is desired, and as
    "real life" permits. In any case, efforts of the core team/developers
    are much appreciated.
    There are several people with relevant experience around, some of them
    being for quite sometime involved in the project. I am sure that a cry
    for help will not get unnoticed, would such a need arise :)
  • R P Herrold at Feb 16, 2009 at 7:55 pm

    On Mon, 16 Feb 2009, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:

    There are several people with relevant experience around,
    some of them being for quite sometime involved in the
    project. I am sure that a cry for help will not get
    unnoticed, would such a need arise :)
    There is a fine line the project walks between the various
    roles which members of the core CentOS team assume over time.

    As it happens this time (although the binaries were reported
    as built), they did not get staged and spun where the
    remaining folks with admin rights could take the next steps
    needed for some QA and release of testing ISOs as we had
    planned and blocked out.

    It happened. In polling the other members not absent last
    week, I think we are of a mind that we will not take steps to
    compound one delay with a workaround which may impair the
    value of work already done by a temporarily absent team member
    -- more than a mere duplication of the build effort is at
    issue here [easy enough with one off local 'leaf' updates, and
    really not that hard in more the general case; just laborious
    -- also the solution paths taken can introduce differing items
    to bugfix for a general release]. I am loathe to possibly
    break that absent member's workflow.

    We are aware of the delay, and will take some steps at
    improving the chokepoints identified this go round, just as we
    do after every point release.

    I wish I had an exact date to offer for a final release, and
    it may be that we decide to expose a 'rough edges' archive for
    those who 'cannot wait' to pick and choose updates from. As I
    understand it, some information we need to talk through such
    an alternative in the update process 1s supposed to surface
    later this week

    -- Russ herrold
  • Axel Thimm at Feb 16, 2009 at 3:23 am
    Hi,
    On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 10:34:54PM +0100, Fabian Arrotin wrote:
    Axel Thimm wrote:
    just a question on whether there is a known ETA for it. The reason I'm
    asking is that I accidentially removed some 5.2. kernel support from
    ATrpms (not for the 5.2 plus kernels, just the vendor ones) and if
    5.3 would take longer I would rebuild the erased bits. Otherwise I
    would ask the users to wait for a couple of days.
    There is still no ETA because QA has not yet started (packages were not
    pushed to the QA tree). We're still waiting for Karanbir to come back
    from his honeymoon and/or Johnny to reappear ... so maybe you'd better
    continue providing support for the 5.2 kernels. But it's up to you of
    course ;-)
    ah, these are wonderful news! Congratulations and a happy honeymoon to
    you, Karanbir!

    I'll fire up support for 5.2. ;)
    --
    Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
    -------------- next part --------------
    A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
    Name: not available
    Type: application/pgp-signature
    Size: 197 bytes
    Desc: not available
    Url : http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20090216/6bc8ac31/attachment.bin
  • Yogesh Sharma at Feb 28, 2009 at 6:20 am
    Hi

    5.3 ETA Yet ?

    Is this one person show ?

    Thanks
    YS
  • Tim Verhoeven at Feb 28, 2009 at 11:01 am

    On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 7:20 AM, Yogesh Sharma wrote:

    5.3 ETA Yet ?
    Still when it is ready, but I would say that in 2 weeks from now it
    should be fairly ready.
    Is this one person show ?
    Definitely not, the QA is currently testing.

    Regards,
    Tim

    --
    Tim Verhoeven - tim.verhoeven.be at gmail.com - 0479 / 88 11 83

    Hoping the problem magically goes away by ignoring it is the
    "microsoft approach to programming" and should never be allowed.
    (Linus Torvalds)
  • Gianluca Sforna at Feb 28, 2009 at 12:42 pm

    On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 12:01 PM, Tim Verhoeven wrote:
    On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 7:20 AM, Yogesh Sharma
    Is this one person show ?
    Definitely not, the QA is currently testing.
    Where does QA take place? Pointers to how to participate?
  • Yogesh Sharma at Mar 1, 2009 at 10:09 am

    On 02/28/09 04:42, Gianluca Sforna wrote:
    On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 12:01 PM, Tim Verhoeven
    wrote:
    On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 7:20 AM, Yogesh Sharma
    Is this one person show ?
    Definitely not, the QA is currently testing.
    Where does QA take place? Pointers to how to participate?

    Can we have an update on CentOS Main page about how 5.3 release is
    progressing ?
  • Marcus Moeller at Mar 1, 2009 at 10:22 am
    Good Morning,
    Can we have an update on CentOS Main page about how 5.3 release is
    progressing ?
    You can listen to twitter:

    http://twitter.com/CentOS

    Best Regards
    Marcus
  • William Warren at Mar 1, 2009 at 12:42 am

    On 2/28/2009 1:20 AM, Yogesh Sharma wrote:
    Hi

    5.3 ETA Yet ?

    Is this one person show ?

    Thanks
    YS
    _______________________________________________
    CentOS-devel mailing list
    CentOS-devel at centos.org
    http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
    one person show? try go searching the forums on centos.org before you
    make a fool of yourself again. If you don't like the pace of
    development..how about you pitch in instead of being asinine?
  • Seth vidal at Mar 1, 2009 at 1:21 am

    On Sat, 2009-02-28 at 19:42 -0500, William Warren wrote:
    On 2/28/2009 1:20 AM, Yogesh Sharma wrote:
    Hi

    5.3 ETA Yet ?

    Is this one person show ?

    Thanks
    YS
    _______________________________________________
    CentOS-devel mailing list
    CentOS-devel at centos.org
    http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
    one person show? try go searching the forums on centos.org before you
    make a fool of yourself again. If you don't like the pace of
    development..how about you pitch in instead of being asinine?
    Calm down. No need to be so upset.

    -sv
  • Yogesh Sharma at Mar 1, 2009 at 10:07 am

    On 02/28/09 16:42, William Warren wrote:
    On 2/28/2009 1:20 AM, Yogesh Sharma wrote:

    Hi

    5.3 ETA Yet ?

    Is this one person show ?

    Thanks
    YS
    _______________________________________________
    CentOS-devel mailing list
    CentOS-devel at centos.org
    http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel

    one person show? try go searching the forums on centos.org before you
    make a fool of yourself again. If you don't like the pace of
    development..how about you pitch in instead of being asinine?
    _______________________________________________
    CentOS-devel mailing list
    CentOS-devel at centos.org
    http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
    What is it that makes you so upset ? Earlier posts wrote "About
    Honeymoon" etc.
    If someone says it is "one person show" to release CentOS, I am sure
    that you will see lot of support ready to pitch in.
  • Scott Silva at Mar 2, 2009 at 4:27 pm

    one person show? try go searching the forums on centos.org before you
    make a fool of yourself again. If you don't like the pace of
    development..how about you pitch in instead of being asinine?
    _______________________________________________
    CentOS-devel mailing list
    CentOS-devel at centos.org
    http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
    What is it that makes you so upset ? Earlier posts wrote "About
    Honeymoon" etc.
    If someone says it is "one person show" to release CentOS, I am sure
    that you will see lot of support ready to pitch in.
    The "honeymoon" info you are speaking about was a one time glitch in the build
    process that was only exposed when one developer was busy. It has probably
    been corrected and shouldn't happen again.

    Usually the developers get irritated, and rightly so, about people hounding
    them for a new release of software they will not pay for, or will not
    contribute toward.

    A bunch of posts of "are we there yet" just make things worse.

    Anybody that is so impatient that they have to bug the devels should just pony
    up for a RHEL subscription. This is like fine wine, and it takes time to get
    it right. You would all be angry if they released too fast and a glaring bug
    surfaces and does some damage to your data or reputations, so patience is the
    best thing.


    --
    MailScanner is like deodorant...
    You hope everybody uses it, and
    you notice quickly if they don't!!!!

    -------------- next part --------------
    A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
    Name: signature.asc
    Type: application/pgp-signature
    Size: 258 bytes
    Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
    Url : http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20090302/513c9a00/attachment.bin
  • Yogesh Sharma at Mar 2, 2009 at 8:40 pm

    On 03/02/09 08:27, Scott Silva wrote:
    Usually the developers get irritated, and rightly so, about people hounding
    them for a new release of software they will not pay for, or will not
    contribute toward.

    A bunch of posts of "are we there yet" just make things worse.

    Anybody that is so impatient that they have to bug the devels should just pony
    up for a RHEL subscription. This is like fine wine, and it takes time to get
    it right. You would all be angry if they released too fast and a glaring bug
    surfaces and does some damage to your data or reputations, so patience is the
    best thing.



    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

    _______________________________________________
    CentOS-devel mailing list
    CentOS-devel at centos.org
    http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
    I agree with your comments at the same time if some information about
    progress can be published or links can be published on centos.org
    website will help others to understand and not whine about it or keep
    posting "are we there yet". I am no where in demand of new version but a
    humble to keep everyone updated.

    Thanks
  • Ray Van Dolson at Mar 2, 2009 at 9:03 pm

    On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 12:40:14PM -0800, Yogesh Sharma wrote:
    On 03/02/09 08:27, Scott Silva wrote:

    Usually the developers get irritated, and rightly so, about people hounding
    them for a new release of software they will not pay for, or will not
    contribute toward.

    A bunch of posts of "are we there yet" just make things worse.

    Anybody that is so impatient that they have to bug the devels should just pony
    up for a RHEL subscription. This is like fine wine, and it takes time to get
    it right. You would all be angry if they released too fast and a glaring bug
    surfaces and does some damage to your data or reputations, so patience is the
    best thing.
    I agree with your comments at the same time if some information about
    progress can be published or links can be published on centos.org
    website will help others to understand and not whine about it or keep
    posting "are we there yet". I am no where in demand of new version but a
    humble to keep everyone updated.
    I think there was an identi.ca or some other twitter'ish feed giving
    the latest updates of progress on 5.3 if I'm not mistaken.

    It might be nice for someone not as involved with the technical side of
    packaging up the system and actually doing the QA to be designated as a
    "PR" person of sorts who could keep tabs on internal progress and post
    periodic updates to the mailing list for people. Definitely natural
    that people should be curious without necessarily wanting to berate
    people for not getting it done "fast enough" :)

    We all definitely appreciate the work of the CentOS team btw!

    Ray
  • Ned Slider at Mar 2, 2009 at 10:30 pm

    Ray Van Dolson wrote:
    It might be nice for someone not as involved with the technical side of
    packaging up the system and actually doing the QA to be designated as a
    "PR" person of sorts who could keep tabs on internal progress and post
    periodic updates to the mailing list for people.
    You mean like this:

    http://www.centos.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id223&forum7

    It's only had 22,000 views so I'm not sure how you came to miss it ;)

    "When will CentOS 5.3 be out" also gives the top 4 hits on google.
  • Ray Van Dolson at Mar 2, 2009 at 10:35 pm

    On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 10:30:41PM +0000, Ned Slider wrote:
    Ray Van Dolson wrote:
    It might be nice for someone not as involved with the technical side of
    packaging up the system and actually doing the QA to be designated as a
    "PR" person of sorts who could keep tabs on internal progress and post
    periodic updates to the mailing list for people.
    You mean like this:

    http://www.centos.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id223&forum7

    It's only had 22,000 views so I'm not sure how you came to miss it ;)

    "When will CentOS 5.3 be out" also gives the top 4 hits on google.
    Pretty easily since I don't ever follow the forums. :-) (Nor have I
    asked when CentOS 5.3 will be out either ;-)

    Ray
  • Milan Keršláger at Mar 5, 2009 at 6:08 am

    Dne 1.3.2009 1:42, William Warren napsal(a):
    On 2/28/2009 1:20 AM, Yogesh Sharma wrote:
    Hi

    5.3 ETA Yet ?

    Is this one person show ?
    one person show? try go searching the forums on centos.org before you
    make a fool of yourself again. If you don't like the pace of
    development..how about you pitch in instead of being asinine?
    I would be glad if the CentOS team be a little bit community-oriented. I
    saw posts here about "soon", then "no QA yet" etc. This leads to me like
    prominent show only and not community project.

    Please ask for help if you are unable to proceed now, soon and quickly.
    We don't want to steal your credit. We want to feel more safe, less
    dependent upon free time of few "core" team members and not be pushed
    into the dark (dont't ask, wait until we are ready, we don't want you
    know about progress etc).

    We still do not have security update for the kernel even 5.2.z release
    is out (2009-02-24). This is extremely pitty as we are able to help but
    we are not supposed to (as we can read here). And we are vulnerable
    (marked as Important)...

    https://www.redhat.com/archives/enterprise-watch-list/2009-February/msg00013.html
  • Gianluca Sforna at Mar 5, 2009 at 8:04 am

    On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 7:08 AM, Milan Ker?l?ger wrote:

    I would be glad if the CentOS team be a little bit community-oriented. I
    saw posts here about "soon", then "no QA yet" etc. This leads to me like
    prominent show only and not community project.
    What I gathered from this thread is that CentOS actually _is_ a
    community project, but the community driving it surely is not using
    centos-devel as a communication medium.

    Instead, i've read the forums are used for that purpose (though I
    can't confirm or deny this assumption, as I have absolutely no time to
    check forums of any kind). Additionally, I saw several replies to the
    "ETA" question stating the packages are ready, but waiting on QA.

    Though, I can't easily find info what QA means in CentOS, who is
    involved in QA, how to help with QA...
  • Karanbir Singh at Mar 5, 2009 at 9:49 am

    Milan Ker?l?ger wrote:
    We still do not have security update for the kernel even 5.2.z release
    is out (2009-02-24). This is extremely pitty as we are able to help but
    we are not supposed to (as we can read here). And we are vulnerable
    (marked as Important)...

    https://www.redhat.com/archives/enterprise-watch-list/2009-February/msg00013.html
    iirc, there was talk about this - and the decision was to not do the
    z-series at all. So I wont be holding my breath if I was you on that one :)

    - KB
  • John Summerfield at Mar 6, 2009 at 12:46 am

    Karanbir Singh wrote:
    Milan Ker?l?ger wrote:
    We still do not have security update for the kernel even 5.2.z release
    is out (2009-02-24). This is extremely pitty as we are able to help but
    we are not supposed to (as we can read here). And we are vulnerable
    (marked as Important)...

    https://www.redhat.com/archives/enterprise-watch-list/2009-February/msg00013.html
    iirc, there was talk about this - and the decision was to not do the
    z-series at all. So I wont be holding my breath if I was you on that one :)
    Eh?
    Who said "z-series?"




    --

    Cheers
    John

    -- spambait
    1aaaaaaa at coco.merseine.nu Z1aaaaaaa at coco.merseine.nu
    -- Advice
    http://webfoot.com/advice/email.top.php
    http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
    http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375

    You cannot reply off-list:-)
  • Phil Schaffner at Mar 6, 2009 at 2:05 am

    On Fri, 2009-03-06 at 09:46 +0900, John Summerfield wrote:
    Karanbir Singh wrote:
    Milan Ker?l?ger wrote:
    We still do not have security update for the kernel even 5.2.z release
    ^^^^^
    is out (2009-02-24). This is extremely pitty as we are able to help but
    we are not supposed to (as we can read here). And we are vulnerable
    (marked as Important)...

    https://www.redhat.com/archives/enterprise-watch-list/2009-February/msg00013.html
    "2. Relevant releases/architectures:

    Red Hat Enterprise Linux (v. 5.2.z server) - i386, ia64, noarch, ppc, s390x, x86_64"
    Eh?
    Who said "z-series?"
    The OP - not that he was expecting it for CentOS, just pointing out our
    shortcomings. :-P

    Cheers,
    Phil
  • Phil Schaffner at Mar 6, 2009 at 2:08 am
    On Thu, 2009-03-05 at 21:05 -0500, Phil Schaffner wrote:
    ...
    The OP - not that he was expecting it for CentOS, just pointing out our
    shortcomings. :-P
    s/OP/Milan/ :-/
  • John Summerfield at Mar 8, 2009 at 2:46 am

    Phil Schaffner wrote:
    On Thu, 2009-03-05 at 21:05 -0500, Phil Schaffner wrote:
    ...
    The OP - not that he was expecting it for CentOS, just pointing out our
    shortcomings. :-P
    s/OP/Milan/ :-/
    I didn't take that to mean z-series because _everyone_ knows CentOS
    doesn't have CentOS5 for them.

    I did a little checking, and I don't see why Milan would be asking about
    zSeries. OTOH, if this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Milan_Kerslager
    is the same person, he doesn't even know where he works:-) so we
    shouldn't be surprised at anything he asks.




    --

    Cheers
    John

    -- spambait
    1aaaaaaa at coco.merseine.nu Z1aaaaaaa at coco.merseine.nu
    -- Advice
    http://webfoot.com/advice/email.top.php
    http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
    http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375

    You cannot reply off-list:-)
  • Dag Wieers at Mar 8, 2009 at 10:25 am

    On Sun, 8 Mar 2009, John Summerfield wrote:

    Phil Schaffner wrote:
    On Thu, 2009-03-05 at 21:05 -0500, Phil Schaffner wrote:
    ...
    The OP - not that he was expecting it for CentOS, just pointing out our
    shortcomings. :-P
    s/OP/Milan/ :-/
    I didn't take that to mean z-series because _everyone_ knows CentOS
    doesn't have CentOS5 for them.
    With z-series they meant Extended Update Support (EUS). To avoid any
    confusion I guess we should coin the term EUS too.

    More information here:

    http://www.press.redhat.com/2008/12/18/red-hat-increases-service-levels-and-reduces-costs-for-customers-with-extended-update-support/

    --
    -- dag wieers, dag at centos.org, http://dag.wieers.com/ --
    [Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors]
  • Phil Schaffner at Mar 5, 2009 at 3:54 pm
    Milan Ker?l?ger wrote:
    ...
    We still do not have security update for the kernel even 5.2.z release
    is out (2009-02-24). This is extremely pitty as we are able to help but
    we are not supposed to (as we can read here). And we are vulnerable
    (marked as Important)...

    https://www.redhat.com/archives/enterprise-watch-list/2009-February/msg00013.html
    Not an official release, but to help address the security issue
    community member Alan Bartlett has made some pre-release kernels available:

    http://centos.toracat.org/ajb/tmp/kernels/
    http://www.centos.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id733&forum7&post_idh804
    http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2009-February/072555.html

    Phil

Related Discussions

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2022 Grokbase